The 3 major radiographic features of the lower pole calix (infundibulopelvic angle, and infundibular length and width) can be easily measured on standard IVP using a ruler and protractor. Each factor individually has a statistically significant influence on stone clearance after ESWL. A wide infundibulopelvic angle or short infundibular length and broad infundibular width regardless of infundibulopelvic angle are significant favorable factors for stone clearance following ESWL. Conversely, these factors have a cumulatively negative effect on the stone clearance rate after ESWL when they are all unfavorable. In ureteroscopy spatial anatomy has less of a role in regard to stone clearance but it may have a negative impact when there is uniformly unfavorable anatomy.

Ureteroscopy and shock wave lithotripsy were associated with high success and low complication rates. However, shock wave lithotripsy required significantly less operating time, was more often performed on an outpatient basis, and showed a trend towards less flank pain and dysuria, fewer complications and quicker convalescence. Patient satisfaction was uniformly high in both groups. Although ureteroscopy and shock wave lithotripsy are highly effective for treatment of distal ureteral stones, we believe that HM3 shock wave lithotripsy, albeit slightly more costly, is preferable to manipulation with ureteroscopy since it is equally efficacious, more efficient and less morbid.

No abstract

Abbreviations & Acronyms LUTS = lower urinary tract symptoms MMS = metal-mesh stents MUO = malignant ureteral obstruction PCN = percutaneous nephrostomy TUS = tandem ureteral stents UTI = urinary tract infection Abstract: Extrinsic malignant compression of the ureter is not uncommon, often refractory to decompression with conventional polymeric ureteral stents, and frequently associated with limited survival. Alternative options for decompression include tandem ureteral stents, metallic stents and metal-mesh stents, though the preferred method remains controversial. We reviewed and updated our outcomes with tandem ureteral stents for malignant ureteral obstruction, and carried out a PubMed search using the terms "malignant ureteral obstruction," "tandem ureteral stents," "ipsilateral ureteral stents," "metal ureteral stent," "resonance stent," "silhouette stent" and "metal mesh stent." A comprehensive review of the literature and summary of outcomes is provided. The majority of studies encountered were retrospective with small sample sizes. The evidence is most robust for metal stents, whereas only limited data exists for tandem or metal-mesh stents. Metal and metal-mesh stents are considerably more expensive than tandem stenting, but the potential for less frequent stent exchanges makes them possibly cost-effective over time. Urinary tract infections have been associated with all stent types. A wide range of failure rates has been published for all types of stents, limiting direct comparison. Metal and metal-mesh stents show a high incidence of stent colic, migration and encrustation, whereas tandem stents appear to produce symptoms equivalent to single stents. Comparison is difficult given the limited evidence and heterogeneity of patients with malignant ureteral obstruction. It is clear that prospective, randomized studies are necessary to effectively scrutinize conventional, tandem, metallic ureteral and metal-mesh stents for their use in malignant ureteral obstruction.